John Andrews, founder of the Low Incomes Tax Reform Group, has received the Chartered Institute of Taxation’s Council Award in recognition of his work as a ‘champion of pensioners and the unrepresented taxpayer’.
‘John has been a powerful champion of the unrepresented on tax and tax credit issues for many years,’ said CIOT president Patrick Stevens.
Anthony Thomas, Andrews’ successor as LITRG chairman, said the group’s achievements were ‘testimony to how one man’s vision and drive can make a real difference for huge numbers of ordinary taxpayers’.
LITRG describes itself as a CIOT initiative to give a voice to those who cannot afford to pay for tax advice: ‘It is often thought that the tax and financial affairs of those on low incomes are simple. This is far from the truth. A combination of complex laws and administrative systems not designed with the low income user in mind often make life difficult for those we try to help. Everything we do is aimed at improving the tax and benefits experience of disabled people and carers, low income workers, pensioners, migrants and students.’
Andrews used his acceptance speech to urge government departments to give a higher priority to the needs of the vulnerable and disadvantaged. ‘We are told that the 80:20 rule applies and that with reduced resources they can only cater for the majority. I don’t buy this, either strategically or practically,’ he said.
‘It is the vulnerable and disadvantaged who almost always end up in the 20%, who get the poor service, whose problems are not considered in advance of implementation, either because these are seen as just too difficult or people operating in their silos don’t recognise the knock-on effects of their proposals; until it is too late. I’d like the people at the top, just for one year perhaps, to say that their equal number one priority was ensuring that those right at the bottom of the economic pile got the very best service and consideration from their departments. I regard this to be the right thing to do at this time of austerity.
‘No policy should be allowed through that has not considered in depth the problems of the vulnerable and put appropriate measures in place to overcome those barriers. For example, [real time information] would have considered the problems of micro-businesses first and ensured that their costs were minimised. Digital by default would ensure that all support was in place for the digitally excluded or disadvantaged before new online initiatives or mandation are launched. Universal credit would plan for those with disabilities or chaotic lives as a priority, rather than last in line using so-called agile technology.’
Tax avoidance debate
Andrews said this week’s House of Commons debate on corporate tax avoidance was ‘generally a more mature debate and a realisation that we have an international problem that cannot be solved on our own’.
But parts of the debate were ‘filled with heat and very little light’, he said. ‘Other parts contained a distinct lack of facts, accompanied by impossible dreams, misunderstandings and many unsupported assertions.’
Opinion was becoming ‘the new truth’ amid a lack of understanding of how tax systems work, Andrews warned, as he challenged ‘assertions in the press that you can judge the right amount of tax a multinational should pay by looking at its turnover’.
He added: ‘I hope that the CIOT pro-actively pick up the challenge in 2013 to ensure the resurrection of facts and to protect his cousin tax law from also being sent to an early grave.’
John Andrews, founder of the Low Incomes Tax Reform Group, has received the Chartered Institute of Taxation’s Council Award in recognition of his work as a ‘champion of pensioners and the unrepresented taxpayer’.
‘John has been a powerful champion of the unrepresented on tax and tax credit issues for many years,’ said CIOT president Patrick Stevens.
Anthony Thomas, Andrews’ successor as LITRG chairman, said the group’s achievements were ‘testimony to how one man’s vision and drive can make a real difference for huge numbers of ordinary taxpayers’.
LITRG describes itself as a CIOT initiative to give a voice to those who cannot afford to pay for tax advice: ‘It is often thought that the tax and financial affairs of those on low incomes are simple. This is far from the truth. A combination of complex laws and administrative systems not designed with the low income user in mind often make life difficult for those we try to help. Everything we do is aimed at improving the tax and benefits experience of disabled people and carers, low income workers, pensioners, migrants and students.’
Andrews used his acceptance speech to urge government departments to give a higher priority to the needs of the vulnerable and disadvantaged. ‘We are told that the 80:20 rule applies and that with reduced resources they can only cater for the majority. I don’t buy this, either strategically or practically,’ he said.
‘It is the vulnerable and disadvantaged who almost always end up in the 20%, who get the poor service, whose problems are not considered in advance of implementation, either because these are seen as just too difficult or people operating in their silos don’t recognise the knock-on effects of their proposals; until it is too late. I’d like the people at the top, just for one year perhaps, to say that their equal number one priority was ensuring that those right at the bottom of the economic pile got the very best service and consideration from their departments. I regard this to be the right thing to do at this time of austerity.
‘No policy should be allowed through that has not considered in depth the problems of the vulnerable and put appropriate measures in place to overcome those barriers. For example, [real time information] would have considered the problems of micro-businesses first and ensured that their costs were minimised. Digital by default would ensure that all support was in place for the digitally excluded or disadvantaged before new online initiatives or mandation are launched. Universal credit would plan for those with disabilities or chaotic lives as a priority, rather than last in line using so-called agile technology.’
Tax avoidance debate
Andrews said this week’s House of Commons debate on corporate tax avoidance was ‘generally a more mature debate and a realisation that we have an international problem that cannot be solved on our own’.
But parts of the debate were ‘filled with heat and very little light’, he said. ‘Other parts contained a distinct lack of facts, accompanied by impossible dreams, misunderstandings and many unsupported assertions.’
Opinion was becoming ‘the new truth’ amid a lack of understanding of how tax systems work, Andrews warned, as he challenged ‘assertions in the press that you can judge the right amount of tax a multinational should pay by looking at its turnover’.
He added: ‘I hope that the CIOT pro-actively pick up the challenge in 2013 to ensure the resurrection of facts and to protect his cousin tax law from also being sent to an early grave.’
